Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 46 references

On the Structure of Frames and Equiangular Lines over Finite Fields and their Connections to Design Theory

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Over finite fields, an equiangular system of lines is an equiangular tight frame exactly when it saturates the Welch bound and every off-diagonal sum of triple products equals the tight-frame constant; the paper proves this when the field…

desk verdict A correct and useful new characterization of ETFs over finite fields in large characteristic, but the abstract overclaims universality and small-characteristic cases are left underexplored. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.12175 v1 pith:7YXALF7N submitted 2025-05-18 math.CO math.MG

Ian Jorquera , Emily J. King This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.COmath.MG MSC 05B0505B3051E2015A63
keywords equiangularlinestightframesoverfinitefieldsWelchboundtripleproductstwo-graphsquasi-symmetricdesignsregularsimplices
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper asks when a collection of equally spaced lines through the origin in a finite-field vector space is an equiangular tight frame (ETF), the finite-field analogue of a structure used in compressed sensing, quantum information, and geometry. Over the real and complex numbers, an equiangular system of lines is an ETF exactly when it saturates the Welch bound; over finite fields the authors show this is necessary but not sufficient. Their main theorem adds one extra condition: the sum over all vectors of each triple product in the Gram matrix must equal a fixed value determined by the frame parameters, and this characterizes ETFs when the field characteristic exceeds the dimension of the spanned space. The same triple-product machinery also characterizes when an ETF contains a regular simplex, and connects maximal incoherent sets to 2-designs, quasi-symmetric designs, and 4-designs. A sympathetic reader should care because finite fields provide infinite families of otherwise-elusive extremal line packings, and knowing which structural theorems survive passage to positive characteristic isolates the combinatorial content of the real and complex results.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the Gram matrix $G = \Phi^\dagger\Phi$ and its triple products $\Delta(\varphi_j,\varphi_k,\varphi_\ell) = \langle\varphi_j,\varphi_k\rangle\langle\varphi_k,\varphi_\ell\rangle\langle\varphi_\ell,\varphi_j\rangle$. The proof tests whether $G^2 - (na/d)G$ is the zero matrix by taking its trace scalar product with each matrix unit $E_{ij}$; the diagonal checks reduce exactly to the Welch relation, and the off-diagonal checks reduce exactly to the triple-product sum condition. A CR-decomposition of the Gram matrix, combined with $\operatorname{char} F > d$, turns the resulting identity into equality of ranks, which makes the image a non-isotropic subspace and hence the system a tight frame for it.

What would settle it

Check whether the eight-vector example over $\mathbb{F}_5$ in Example 5.14 satisfies the triple-product sum condition of Theorem 5.16: the off-diagonal entry of $(\Phi^\dagger\Phi)^2 - (na/d)\Phi^\dagger\Phi$ is exactly the difference between that sum and the required value $nab/d$, so the computation decides whether the extra condition alone would have caught the example's failure to be an ETF.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Let $\Phi = (\varphi_j)_{j=1}^n$ be an $(a,b)$-equiangular system in a non-isotropic space $V$ (a space with a non-degenerate scalar product), and write $d = \dim(\operatorname{im}\Phi)$. Theorem 5.16 states that, when $\operatorname{char} F > d$ and $na/d \neq 0$, $\Phi$ is an $(a,b,(n/d)a)$-ETF for its image if and only if the Welch relation $(n-1)b = ((n-d)/d)a^2$ holds and, for every $j \neq k$, the triple-product sum $\sum_{\ell=1}^n \Delta(\varphi_j,\varphi_k,\varphi_\ell)$ equals $nab/d$. The forward direction is a trace identity; the reverse direction uses the trace scalar product on matrices to show that these scalar equalities force the Gram-matrix identity $(\Phi^\dagger\Phi)^2 = (na/d)\Phi^\dagger\Phi$, and the characteristic hypothesis then upgrades that algebraic relation to genuine tightness by comparing ranks. Thus finite fields preserve the classical theorem only after appending a triple-product sum condition, and only away from small characteristic.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the field's characteristic is larger than the dimension $d$ of the spanned space, so that an algebraic identity in the Gram matrix can be converted into a statement about ranks; in smaller characteristic that conversion can fail, and the paper does not prove the characterization there.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In a non-isotropic space with $\operatorname{char} F > d$, an $(a,b)$-equiangular system is an $(a,b,(n/d)a)$-ETF exactly when the Welch relation holds and all triple-product sums equal $nab/d$; in particular, Welch saturation alone is insufficient, as Example 5.14 shows.
  • When the same hypotheses hold and $\Phi$ is already a frame for the full space (with $\operatorname{char} F$ not dividing $d$), the same two conditions characterize ETFs.
  • A subset of $s+1$ vectors of an ETF forms a regular $s$-simplex exactly when $a^2 = s^2 b$, the subset spans an $s$-dimensional space, and its triple-product sums satisfy the corresponding identity.
  • In orthogonal geometries with $p > n$, an $(a,1)$-equiangular frame induces a regular two-graph if and only if it is an ETF, so regular two-graphs and finite-field ETFs coincide there.
  • Under the hypotheses of Theorem 7.12, maximal incoherent sets of such ETFs form 2-designs, quasi-symmetric 2-designs, and in the maximal-line case 4-designs, connecting finite-field line packings to classical design theory.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The small-characteristic gap left open is a natural next target: evaluating the triple-product sums in Example 5.14 would show whether the extra condition alone, without $\operatorname{char} F > d$, detects the failure of tightness or whether the characteristic hypothesis is genuinely essential.
  • Because the proof converts tightness into finitely many polynomial equations in the Gram-matrix entries, the same criterion could be used as a computer-search filter for finite-field ETFs, checked directly from pairwise scalar products without constructing the frame.
  • The design-theoretic consequences suggest a finite-field analogue of the incoherence program for maximal real line packings: classifying $d$-dimensional ETFs with $n = d(d+1)/2$ in orthogonal geometries would amount to classifying 4-designs with prescribed intersection numbers, potentially producing infinite families in dimensions where real ETFs are conjectured not to exist.
  • Since switching equivalence of equiangular systems is determined by double and triple products, finite-field ETFs could be enumerated up to switching equivalence by enumerating two-graphs, mirroring the classical relationship for real ETFs.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper develops frame theory over finite fields, focusing on equiangular systems and equiangular tight frames (ETFs). Section 3 characterizes switching equivalence of frames through equality of m-products, extending results known over the real and complex numbers. Section 5 contains the main structural result: Theorem 5.16 shows that, under the hypotheses char F > d and na/d != 0, an (a,b)-equiangular system with d = dim(im Phi) is an (a,b,(n/d)a)-ETF for its image if and only if it saturates the Welch relation and satisfies a triple-product sum condition. The section also develops Naimark complements over finite fields and proves a connection between ETFs in orthogonal geometries and regular two-graphs (Theorem 5.19). Section 6 characterizes when an ETF contains regular simplices in terms of triple products, with finite-field examples including a (0,1,0)-ETF over F_3^4 containing regular 3-simplices. Section 7 generalizes incoherent sets and quasi-symmetric designs to orthogonal geometries, yielding design-theoretic consequences such as Theorem 7.12. The central algebraic proofs are self-contained and do not rely on fitted parameters, but the abstract states the main characterization without the characteristic restrictions that the theorem actually requires, and several computational examples are asserted without proof or code.

Significance. If the results are correct, the paper makes a genuine contribution to the young theory of frames over finite fields. The main novelty is the triple-product sum condition in Theorem 5.16, which shows that the classical equivalence between Welch-bound saturation and ETF-ness over R and C requires an additional structural condition over finite fields. The simplex characterizations in Section 6 and the design-theoretic consequences in Section 7 are interesting and plausibly useful for future constructions. The proofs of Theorems 5.16 and 6.7 are largely self-contained, and the paper contains several instructive examples that illustrate the small-characteristic pathologies. However, the abstract overstates the scope of the main theorem by omitting the large-characteristic hypothesis, and some load-bearing edge cases and computational enumerations are left insufficiently supported.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract; Theorem 5.16] The abstract states a necessary and sufficient condition for equiangular systems over finite fields to be ETFs without mentioning any characteristic restriction, but Theorem 5.16 is proved only under the hypotheses char F > d and na/d != 0. The trace argument in Theorem 5.7 uses char F > d to pass from (Phi^dag Phi)^2 = (na/d)Phi^dag Phi to rank(Phi^dag Phi) = d, so the characterization is not established in small characteristic. Please revise the abstract and introduction to state the theorem's hypotheses explicitly, and either prove the small-characteristic case or identify it as open.
  2. [Example 5.14; Theorem 5.16] The counterexample in Example 5.14 is an (a,b)-equiangular system over F_5 with d = 7 that satisfies the Welch relation but is not tight, showing that Welch saturation alone is insufficient when char F <= d. However, the paper does not check whether this example satisfies or fails the triple-product sum condition of Theorem 5.16. If the triple-product condition also fails, the example would support the necessity of the additional condition; if it holds, it would be a counterexample to the natural extension of Theorem 5.16. Please compute the relevant sums and report the outcome.
  3. [Theorem 6.7, proof] In the proof of Theorem 6.7, the non-degeneracy argument says 'consider a vector phi_k in Phi' without distinguishing the cases k in kappa and k not in kappa. For k not in kappa, the required vanishing is exactly the stated hypothesis, but for k in kappa it must be derived from the construction of C and the structure of the sub-simplex; as written, that case is omitted. Please add the missing argument so that the proof covers all vectors in Phi.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 3, after Definition 3.8] The sentence 'In case O we note that eta_{j,k} = 1 for all j,k' is incorrect: for an orthogonal equiangular system the exponential gauge is ±1, depending on the sign of <phi_j,phi_k>. The later identity eta_{j,k} eta_{k,j} = 1 is consistent with eta_{j,k} = ±1, and the proofs do not appear to rely on the false claim, but the sentence should be corrected.
  2. [Theorem 5.16, proof] In the i != j case, the proof first assumes b != 0 and divides by <phi_i,phi_j>, then notes parenthetically that b = 0 gives the same result. Please move the b = 0 argument before the division so that no expression involving division by a possibly zero scalar appears.
  3. [Examples 6.8 and 7.8] The enumeration of 30 regular 3-simplices and the two 2-(10,4,2) designs in Example 6.8, as well as the maximal incoherence sizes in Example 7.8, are asserted without code or derivation. Since these examples carry part of the design-theoretic motivation, please provide a reproducible verification or explicitly label the claims as computer-assisted and give the relevant code or input data.
  4. [Section 7.1, Lemmas 7.9-7.11] Several proofs in Section 7.1 leave substantial steps to the cited literature, for example 'The rest of the proof follows from the proof in [37]' and 'the proof uses only that Phi forms a regular two-graph'. For a self-contained paper, it would be helpful to include the missing computations or to state precisely which results from [37] are being imported.
  5. [Throughout] There are numerous small typos (e.g., 'compliment' for 'complement') and some under-specified choices, such as the fixed square-root function in Definition 3.8 and the meaning of 'smallest integer' in Lemmas 7.9 and 7.10. A careful copyedit would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the main characterization derives its conditions from trace and Frobenius-inner-product identities rather than assuming them.

full rationale

The central result, Theorem 5.16, is a derivation from definitions and previously established external results, not a repackaging of its own conclusion. The two conditions in the theorem are obtained by direct computation: the Welch-type relation (n−1)b = ((n−d)/d)a^2 is derived from the trace identities tr(Φ†Φ)=na=dc and a(c−a)=(n−1)b, and the triple-product sum condition is derived from the identity P ℓ Δ(φj,φk,φℓ) = cb for an ETF. The sufficiency direction proves (Φ†Φ)^2 = (na/d)Φ†Φ by showing the Frobenius inner product of this matrix with every basis matrix Eij vanishes, using precisely the two assumed conditions. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no equation is equivalent to its input by construction. Citations to [20] and [21] are external prior work and are used for standard Gram-matrix characterizations, Naimark complements, and two-graph/ETF connections; they do not smuggle in the paper's main claim. The one current-author citation, [25], is only motivational context for studying triple products, not load-bearing. The abstract's omission of the characteristic restriction char F > d is a scoping/correctness concern, not evidence of circularity; the theorem itself states the hypothesis, and Example 5.14 is honestly presented as a characteristic-small obstruction to the unqualified statement. Overall, the derivation chain is self-contained and non-circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central theorems rest on standard results in the geometry of Hermitian and symmetric forms, on imported frame-theoretic propositions from Greaves, Iverson, Jasper, and Mixon [20,21], and on classical facts about two-graphs and designs. No parameters are fitted to data and no new entities are postulated; the paper's assumptions are explicit characteristic bounds and non-degeneracy requirements.

assumptions (6)
  • standard math Witt's extension theorem for isometries between subspaces of non-degenerate spaces
    Used in Lemma 3.2 to extend the isometry between im Phi and im Psi to a unitary on V.
  • standard math Classification of non-degenerate Hermitian and symmetric scalar products (Lemma 2.2) and existence of discriminants
    Used throughout to normalize Gram matrices and to define discriminants; relies on standard form classification.
  • domain assumption Results from [20]: Propositions 3.5, 3.11, 3.13, 3.15, 3.22, 3.23, Theorem 4.2
    Core frame-theoretic lemmas over finite fields are imported from earlier work without reproof.
  • domain assumption Theorem 4.3 of [21] on SRG_p and (a,1)-ETFs
    Used in the proof of Theorem 5.19 to convert between equiangular frames, regular two-graphs, and modular strongly regular graphs.
  • standard math Properties of two-graphs, strongly regular graphs, and Fisher's inequality from [7]
    Used in Sections 4, 5.4, and 7.1 for the design-theoretic consequences.
  • ad hoc to paper Characteristic restrictions char F > d (Theorem 5.16) and p > n (Theorem 5.19)
    These hypotheses are built into the main theorems; they are not derived and are load-bearing, as Theorem 5.7 and the SRG_p-to-SRG step require them. Example 5.14 shows the result can fail without them.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of On the Structure of Frames and Equiangular Lines over Finite Fields and their Connections to Design Theory." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7YXALF7N

@misc{pith2026250512175,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: On the Structure of Frames and Equiangular Lines over Finite Fields and their Connections to Design Theory},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7YXALF7N}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.12175}
}
abstract

This paper concerns frames and equiangular lines over finite fields. We find a necessary and sufficient condition for systems of equiangular lines over finite fields to be equiangular tight frames (ETFs). As is the case over subfields of $\mathbb{C}$, it is necessary for the Welch bound to be saturated, but there is an additional condition required involving sums of triple products. We also prove that similar to the case over $\mathbb{C}$, collections of vectors are similar to a regular simplex essentially when the triple products of their scalar products satisfy a certain property. Finally, we investigate switching equivalence classes of frames and systems of lines focusing on systems of equiangular lines in finite orthogonal geometries with maximal incoherent sets, drawing connections to combinatorial design theory.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    The Lie algebraic significance of symmetric informationally complete measurements

    DM Appleby, Steven T Flammia, and Christopher A Fuchs. The Lie algebraic significance of symmetric informationally complete measurements. J. Math. Phys. , 52(2), 2011

    work page 2011

  2. [2]

    Dimension towers of SICs

    Marcus Appleby, Ingemar Bengtsson, Irina Dumitru, and Steven Flammia. Dimension towers of SICs. I. Aligned SICs and embedded tight frames. J. Math. Phys , 58(11), 2017

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

    A constructive approach to Zauner’s conjecture via the Stark conjectures

    Marcus Appleby, Steven T Flammia, and Gene S Kopp. A constructive approach to Zauner’s conjecture via the Stark conjectures. arXiv:2501.03970, 2025

    arXiv 2025

  4. [4]

    Bandeira, Matthew Fickus, Dustin G

    Afonso S. Bandeira, Matthew Fickus, Dustin G. Mixon, and Percy Wong. The road to deter- ministic matrices with the restricted isometry property. J. Fourier Anal. Appl. , 19(6):1123– 1149, 2013

    work page 2013

  5. [5]

    Bodmann, My Le, Letty Reza, Matthew Tobin, and Mark Tomforde

    Bernhard G. Bodmann, My Le, Letty Reza, Matthew Tobin, and Mark Tomforde. Frame theory for binary vector spaces. Involve, 2(5):589–602, 2009

    work page 2009

  6. [6]

    Congruence criteria for finite subsets of complexpro- jective and complex hyperbolic spaces

    Ulrich Brehm and Boumediene Et-Taoui. Congruence criteria for finite subsets of complexpro- jective and complex hyperbolic spaces. manuscripta mathematica, 96(1):81–95, May 1998

    work page 1998

  7. [7]

    P. J. Cameron and J. H. van Lint. Designs, graphs, codes and their links , volume 22 of London Mathematical Society Student Texts . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1991

    work page 1991

  8. [8]

    Casazza, Matthew Fickus, Dustin G

    Peter G. Casazza, Matthew Fickus, Dustin G. Mixon, Jesse Peterson, and Ihar Smalyanau. Every Hilbert space frame has a Naimark complement. J. Math. Anal. Appl. , 406(1):111–119, 2013

    work page 2013

Show all 46 references
  1. [9]

    A characterization of projective unitary equivalence of finite frames and applications

    Tuan-Yow Chien and Shayne Waldron. A characterization of projective unitary equivalence of finite frames and applications. SIAM J. Discrete Math. , 30(2):976–994, 2016

    2016

  2. [10]

    Xingde Dai and David R. Larson. Wandering vectors for unitary systems and orthogonal wavelets. Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. , 134(640):viii+68, 1998

    1998

  3. [11]

    Hoan Bui Dang, Kate Blanchfield, Ingemar Bengtsson, and D. M. Appleby. Linear dependencies in Weyl–Heisenberg orbits. Quantum Information Processing, 12(11):3449–3475, Nov 2013

    2013

  4. [12]

    Grossmann, and Y

    Ingrid Daubechies, A. Grossmann, and Y. Meyer. Painless nonorthogonal expansions. J. Math. Phys., 27(5):1271–1283, 1986

    1986

  5. [13]

    Fejes T´ oth

    L. Fejes T´ oth. Distribution of points in the elliptic plane. Acta Math. Acad. Sci. Hungar. , 16:437–440, 1965

    1965

  6. [14]

    King, and Dustin G

    Matthew Fickus, John Jasper, Emily J. King, and Dustin G. Mixon. Equiangular tight frames that contain regular simplices. Linear Algebra Appl., 555:98–138, 2018

    2018

  7. [15]

    Mixon, and Jesse Peterson

    Matthew Fickus, John Jasper, Dustin G. Mixon, and Jesse Peterson. Tremain equiangular tight frames. J. Combin. Theory Ser. A , 153:54–66, 2018

    2018

  8. [16]

    Mixon, and Janet C

    Matthew Fickus, Dustin G. Mixon, and Janet C. Tremain. Steiner equiangular tight frames. Linear Algebra Appl., 436(5):1014–1027, 2012. 35

    2012

  9. [17]

    Fuchs, Michael C

    Christopher A. Fuchs, Michael C. Hoang, and Blake C. Stacey. The SIC question: History and state of play. Axioms, 6(3), 2017

    2017

  10. [18]

    P. X. Gallagher and R. J. Proulx. Orthogonal and unitary invariants of families of subspaces. In Contributions to algebra (collection of papers dedicated to Ellis Kolchin) , pages 157–164. Academic Press, New York-London, 1977

    1977

  11. [19]

    Equiangular lines, incoherent sets and quasi-symmetric designs

    Neil I Gillespie. Equiangular lines, incoherent sets and quasi-symmetric designs. arXiv preprint arXiv:1809.05739, 2018

    2018 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Gary R. W. Greaves, Joseph W. Iverson, John Jasper, and Dustin G. Mixon. Frames over finite fields: basic theory and equiangular lines in unitary geometry. Finite Fields Appl. , 77:Paper No. 101954, 41, 2022

    2022

  13. [21]

    Gary R. W. Greaves, Joseph W. Iverson, John Jasper, and Dustin G. Mixon. Frames over finite fields: equiangular lines in orthogonal geometry. Linear Algebra Appl., 639:50–80, 2022

    2022

  14. [22]

    d = 3 SIC-POVMs and elliptic curves

    Lane Hughston. d = 3 SIC-POVMs and elliptic curves. Perimeter Institute, Seminar Talk, http://pirsa.org/07100040/, October 2007

    2007

  15. [23]

    Iverson, Emily J

    Joseph W. Iverson, Emily J. King, and Dustin G. Mixon. A note on tight projective 2-designs. J. Combin. Des. , 29(12):809–832, 2021

    2021

  16. [24]

    Bilinear forms

    Nathan Jacobson. Bilinear forms. In Nathan Jacobson, editor, Lectures in Abstract Algebra: II. Linear Algebra, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, pages 136–171. Springer, New York, NY, 1953

    1953

  17. [25]

    2-and 3-covariant equiangular tight frames

    Emily J King. 2-and 3-covariant equiangular tight frames. In 2019 13th International confer- ence on Sampling Theory and Applications (SampTA) , pages 1–4. IEEE, 2019

    2019

  18. [26]

    The impossibility of extending the Naimark complement

    Emily J King and Dustin G Mixon. The impossibility of extending the Naimark complement. arXiv:2504.09534, 2025

    2025

  19. [27]

    P. W. H. Lemmens and J. J. Seidel. Equiangular lines. J. Algebra, 24:494–512, 1973

    1973

  20. [28]

    Finite Fields

    Rudolf Lidl and Harald Niederreiter. Finite Fields . Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2 edition, 1996

    1996

  21. [29]

    Davidson

    Ahmed Medra and Timothy N. Davidson. Flexible codebook design for limited feedback sys- tems via sequential smooth optimization on the Grassmannian manifold. IEEE Trans. Signal Process., 62(5):1305–1318, 2014

    2014

  22. [30]

    Mixon, Christopher J

    Dustin G. Mixon, Christopher J. Quinn, Negar Kiyavash, and Matthew Fickus. Fingerprinting with equiangular tight frames. IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory , 59(3):1855–1865, 2013

    2013

  23. [31]

    Neumaier

    A. Neumaier. Regular sets and quasi-symmetric 2-designs. In Dieter Jungnickel and Klaus Ved- der, editors, Combinatorial Theory, pages 258–275, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1982. Springer Berlin Heidelberg

    1982

  24. [32]

    M. A. Neumark. On a representation of additive operator set functions. C. R. (Doklady) Acad. Sci. URSS (N.S.) , 41:359–361, 1943. 36

    1943

  25. [33]

    Renes, Robin Blume-Kohout, A

    Joseph M. Renes, Robin Blume-Kohout, A. J. Scott, and Carlton M. Caves. Symmetric infor- mationally complete quantum measurements. J. Math. Phys. , 45(6):2171–2180, 2004

    2004

  26. [34]

    J. J. Seidel. A survey of two-graphs. In Colloquio Internazionale sulle Teorie Combinatorie (Roma, 1973), Tomo I , pages 481–511. Accad. Naz. Lincei, Rome, 1976

    1973

  27. [35]

    Geometry and constructions of finite frames

    Nate Strawn. Geometry and constructions of finite frames. Master’s thesis, Texas A&M University, May 2007

    2007

  28. [36]

    Heath, Jr

    Thomas Strohmer and Robert W. Heath, Jr. Grassmannian frames with applications to coding and communication. Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal. , 14(3):257–275, 2003

    2003

  29. [37]

    D. E. Taylor. Regular 2-graphs. Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) , 35(2):257–274, 1977

    1977

  30. [38]

    J. H. Van Lint and J. J. Seidel. Equilateral point sets in elliptic geometry. Indagationes Mathematicae, Proc. Koninkl. Ned. Akad. Wetenschap. Ser. A , 69(3):335–34, 1966

    1966

  31. [39]

    On the construction of equiangular frames from graphs

    Shayne Waldron. On the construction of equiangular frames from graphs. Linear Algebra Appl., 431(11):2228–2242, 2009

    2009

  32. [40]

    Tight frames over the quaternions and equiangular lines

    Shayne Waldron. Tight frames over the quaternions and equiangular lines. arXiv:2006.06126, 2020

    2006 arXiv

  33. [41]

    L. Welch. Lower bounds on the maximum cross correlation of signals. IEEE Trans Inf Theory, 20(3):397–399, May 1974

    1974

  34. [42]

    James B. Wilson. Decomposing p-groups via Jordan algebras. J. Algebra, 322(8):2642–2679, 2009

    2009

  35. [43]

    Giannakis

    Pengfei Xia, Shengli Zhou, and Georgios B. Giannakis. Achieving the Welch bound with difference sets. IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory , 51(5):1900–1907, 2005

    1900

  36. [44]

    G. Zauner. Quantendesigns - Grundz¨ uge einer nichtkommutativen Designtheorie. PhD thesis, University Wien (Austria), 1999. English translation in International Journal of Quantum Information (IJQI) 9 (1), 445–507, 2011

    1999

  37. [45]

    G. Zauner. Quantum designs: foundations of a noncommutative design theory. Int. J. Quantum Inf., 9(1):445–507, 2011

    2011

  38. [46]

    Super-symmetric informationally complete measurements

    Huangjun Zhu. Super-symmetric informationally complete measurements. Ann. Physics , 362:311–326, 2015. 37

    2015

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.